Jarideo Barma @ Jari Deb Barma @ Jari Debbarma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1103 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2021 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia ====================================================== Jarideo Barma @ Jari Deb Barma @ Jari Debbarma S/o Barun Debbarma Resident of Patnipara, P.S.- Mandwi, District- Pashchim Tripura (Tripura) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md Fazle Karim For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-01-2023 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioner and Ld. APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special Case No. 58 of 2021 (NDPS Act) arising out of Baisi P.S. Case No. 203 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8, 21(b)(ii)(c), 25, 28 and 29 of the N.D.P.S Act.

As per allegation, 516.98 kg of Ganja has been recovered from the cabin of a truck bearing Registration No. NL-06C- 8529.

Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1103 of 2022(5) dt.10-01-2023 2/3 case. He further submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner was arrested while driving the Scorpio on account of confessional statement of the driver of the truck in which the contraband being was transported. As such, case against the accused-petitioner is based only on suspicion and confessional statement of the co-accused. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 17.07.2021.

It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has earlier been made accused in one other case.

It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.

However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail submitting that the seized contraband is in huge amount and much above the commercial quantity and he is the main person behind

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1103 of 2022(5) dt.10-01-2023 3/3 the trade of contraband.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within 6 (Six) months, failing which, the petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

This petition is dismissed accordingly.

Ld. counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects, if any, pointed out by the office within a period of one month and the Registry is directed to issue the certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections.

(Jitendra Kumar, J) chandan/- U T